Halakhah zu Schemot 23:1
לֹ֥א תִשָּׂ֖א שֵׁ֣מַע שָׁ֑וְא אַל־תָּ֤שֶׁת יָֽדְךָ֙ עִם־רָשָׁ֔ע לִהְיֹ֖ת עֵ֥ד חָמָֽס׃ (ס)
Verbreite kein falsches Gerücht; reiche deine Hand nicht dem Frevler, um ein falscher Zeuge zu sein.
Chofetz Chaim
It is forbidden to accept lashon hara according to the Torah, both in things "between man and his Maker" and things "between man and his neighbor." That is, we may not believe in our hearts that what is said is true. For, if we do, we will look down upon the one spoken of. And [this applies] even if he [the hearer] explicitly disagrees with what is said. For if not, he doubles the sin — speaking [(by being an accessory to the speaker)] and accepting. And the accepter transgresses (Shemoth 23:1): "You shall not bear a false report," concerning which Chazal have said in the Mechilta, that this is an exhortation against accepting lashon hara, aside from the other negative commandments and positive commandments adjoined to this, as we have written in the introduction. And Chazal have said (Pesachim 118a) that all who accept lashon hara deserve to be cast to the dogs, it being written "You shall not bear a false report," preceded by (Ibid 22:30): "To the dog shall you cast it." And they have also said (Rambam, Hilchoth Deoth 7:13): "The punishment of the accepter is grater than that of the teller."
Ask RabbiBookmarkShareCopy
Chofetz Chaim
Just as it is forbidden to accept lashon hara, according to the Torah, so is it forbidden to accept rechiluth according to the Torah, it, too, being in the category of lashon hara. That is, he must not believe in his heart that what was told him about Ploni's having done to him or said about him is true. And the accepter transgresses (Shemoth 23:1): "You shall not bear a false report," aside from the other negative and positive commandments that 104 are adjoined to this, as explained above in the introduction. And Chazal have said (Arachin 15b): "Lashon hara kills three: the speaker, the accepter, and the one it was said about" (as we know from the episode of Doeg, who was banished from the world to come because of [speaking] rechiluth; and Nov the city of Cohanim was wiped out because of the rechiluth spoken about them; and Saul was killed thereafter because of having accepted the rechiluth). And the accepter is worse than the speaker. And Chazal have said (Pesachim 118a) that if one speaks lashon hara or accepts lashon hara, he is fit to be cast to the dogs, it being written: "You shall not bear a false report," preceded by: "To the dog shall you cast it."
Ask RabbiBookmarkShareCopy
Chofetz Chaim
2) And the speaker or the receiver [of lashon hara] also transgresses (Shemoth 23:1): "Do not receive [tissa] a false report," which can also be read as: "Do not spread [tassi] a false report," so that this negative commandment includes both [the speaker and the receiver].
Ask RabbiBookmarkShareCopy
Gray Matter I
In general, anyone designated by the Halachah as a rasha (sinner) cannot serve as a witness (Shemot 23:1). Thus, anyone who commits a sin punishable by malkot (lashes) cannot serve as a witness (as the Torah refers to one who is punished by malkot as a rasha, in Devarim 25:2). Similarly, deliberately violating a Torah law that is punishable by kareit or death disqualifies one as a witness. In addition, one who engages in theft or other monetary offenses and one who does not believe in the thirteen basic beliefs of Judaism cannot serve as witnesses. Nonetheless, the Gemara (Sanhedrin 26b) recounts:
Ask RabbiBookmarkShareCopy
Chofetz Chaim
First we must know the principles of these halachoth of lashon hara and rechiluth. ("Lashon hara" is speaking disparagingly against one's friend, and "rechiluth," telling one the evil thing that his friend has spoken against him or done against him.) [The principles]: It [lashon hara and rechiluth] is forbidden even if true, as will be explained below, please G–d, in the name of all the poskim. Also, the prohibition of lashon hara and rechiluth applies both in his [the object's] presence and not in his presence. Also, there is no difference between speaking and receiving [lashon hara and rechiluth], all of which we shall explain further. A "receiver" of lashon hara is one who believes in his heart what is told him by his friend even if he does not abet him in the telling but only believes in his heart the lashon hara and rechiluth that he has heard. If he does believe it, he is called "the bearer of a false report" and transgresses (Shemoth 23:1): "Do not bear a false report." All of these principles have roots and branches, as in the other parts of the Torah. May the L–rd grant that we know them comprehensively.
Ask RabbiBookmarkShareCopy
Sefer HaMitzvot
Behold it is already been completely explained that it is inappropriate to count every negative or positive commandment that is found in the Torah, for it [may be] a repetition. Indeed it is appropriate to count [only] the content that we are commanded about or prohibited from. And it is impossible to have knowledge of a repeated negative or positive commandment that is coming to give additional content, without a teacher that instructs it. And [these teachers] are those that received the traditional explanation, peace be upon them. And do not err also because the prohibition is repeated with different words - like His, may He be exalted, saying (Leviticus 19:10), "You shall not pick (teollel) your vineyard bare," once He also said (Deuteronomy 24:19), "and overlook a sheaf in the field, do not turn back to get it," and He said (Deuteronomy 24:20), "When you beat down the fruit of your olive trees, do not extract (tefaer) again." For these are not two negative commandments, but rather one prohibition about one matter - and that is that he not take that which he overlooked from the grain or the fruits when he gathers them. And He brought two examples about them - from grapes and from olives. And He called what is left of the grapes ollelot; and of the olives, "pe'erot. And the understanding of tefaer is do not remove that which you have overlooked in some of your pe'erot - and those are the branches. (See the glosses on this book.) And to this principle, it is appropriate to attach that which I will [now] say. And that is that when I say that it is appropriate that they count the content about which we are commanded or from which we are prohibited, it is on condition that the content that we are prohibited is a separate negative commandment for each and every matter; or that the transmitters [present] a proof that separates one matter from another and that each of them requires [its own] prohibition. However when there is one negative commandment that includes many matters, only that negative commandment is counted, and not all of the content that is included in that negative commandment. And this is a general prohibition, for which we do not give lashes - as we will now explain. And that is that they said (Sanhedrin 63a) in explanation of His saying, "You shall not eat upon the blood" (Leviticus 19:26), "From where [do we know] that one who eats from an animal before its soul departs is in [transgression of] a negative commandment? As it is stated, 'You shall not eat upon the blood.' Another matter: From where is it derived that one who eats the meat of an offering before the blood has been sprinkled [on the altar] is in [transgression of] a negative commandment? We learn to say,'You shall not eat upon the blood' - you shall not eat the meat when the blood is still in the bowl. Rabbi Dosa says, 'From where [do we know] that we do not provide a meal for mourners of those executed by the court? We learn to say, "You shall not eat upon the blood."' Rabbi Akiva says, 'From where [do we know] that a Sanhedrin that killed a soul (i.e., that sentenced a person to death) may not taste anything that entire day? We learn to say, "You shall not eat upon the blood."' Rabbi Yochanan says, 'From where [do we know] the prohibition against the behavior of a stubborn and rebellious son? We learn to say, "You shall not eat upon the blood."'" Behold that we are prohibited from all of these five things, but they they are all included under one negative commandment. And they also said (Berakhot 10b), "From where [do we know] that a person should not taste anything until he prays? We learn to say, 'You shall not eat upon the blood' - you may not eat before you pray for your blood." And in explanation, they said in the Gemara (Sanhedrin 63a), "For all of [these specific prohibitions], he is not given lashes - as it is a general negative commandment." And they also explained that a general negative commandment is when two or three prohibitions come from one negative commandment. So it is inappropriate that they should count each and every prohibition it included as a separate negative commandment; but rather only the one negative commandment that includes all of them. And similar to this negative commandment - meaning, "You shall not eat upon the blood," - is His saying, "you shall not place a stumbling block before the blind" (Leviticus 19:14). As it also includes many matters, as will be explained (Sefer HaMitzvot, Negative Commandments 299). And likewise, His saying, "You must not carry a false rumor" (Exodus 23:1) - behold, it too includes many matters, as will be explained (Sefer HaMitzvot, Negative Commandments 281). And this is one of the types of general negative commandments.
Ask RabbiBookmarkShareCopy
Sefer HaChinukh
To not hear the claim of a litigant when it is not in front of his fellow litigant: That the judge not hear the claim of one, not in front of his adversary, as it is stated (Exodus 23:1), "You shall not raise a false report." And the reason is because people will speak idle words when not in front of their adversary. And the judge is commanded about this so that he not bring the untruths of one of them into his soul. And so does Mekhilta d'Rabbi Yishmael 23:1 come [to tell us] that this warning of "You shall not raise, etc." is said about this. And they also said there that it is also a warning to the litigant, for him too, not to make his claims to the judge not in front of his adversary, and even if the judge wants to hear it. And about this, it is also said (Exodus 23:7), "From a false matter, distance yourself." And they, may their memory be blessed, also said (Makkot 23a) that this negative commandment includes telling evil speech, and accepting it, and giving false testimony.
Ask RabbiBookmarkShareCopy
Sefer HaChinukh
Not to have a sinner testify: That we not accept the testimony of a man who sins, and we not do anything on account of his testimony, as it is stated (Exodus 23:1), "do not place your hand with an evildoer to be a violent witness." And the explanation comes about this (Sanhedrin 27a), "Do not place an evildoer as a witness, do not place a violent one as a witness," meaning a violent person - to exclude violent people and thieves who are disqualified from testimony, as it is stated (Deuteronomy 19:16), "If a violent witness comes upon a man."
Ask RabbiBookmarkShareCopy
Contemporary Halakhic Problems, Vol III
In situations in which such a loan is forbidden the prohibition is predicated upon the consideration that "one dare not strengthen the hands of transgressors" (ein maḥazikin yedei ovrei aveirah). The prohibition against performing acts included in this category is generally regarded as rabbinic in nature. The prohibition is designed to proscribe certain activities which are excluded from the ambit of the biblical prohibition against "placing a stumbling-block before the blind" by virtue of the absence of an intrinsic cause-and-effect relationship between the assistance rendered and the resultant transgression. Rabbi Gestetner, however, cites the statement of Rambam, Commentary on the Mishnah, Terumot 6:3, to the effect that the prohibition against such action is rooted in the biblical admonition, "Do not put your hand with the wicked" (Exodus 23:1).
Ask RabbiBookmarkShareCopy
Sefer HaChinukh
And that which they, may their memory be blessed, also said (Ketuvot 28a) that with testimony about a signature, a relative is trusted to testify about the writing of his relative, that he recognizes it - and he combines with another to validate the deed. And with this testimony a man is trusted when he is an adult to testify and say, "When I was small, I saw the writing of my father - or my brother - and I recognize it now, that it is the one that I saw." And that which they said that ten creatures are disqualified for testimony from Torah writ, and like I wrote above in the commandment of "do not place your hand with an evildoer to be a witness" (Sefer HaChinukh 75). And so [too,] one who is not [involved] in Scripture, nor in Mishnah, nor in the way of the world (productive work) is disqualified by the words of [the Rabbis], as there is an assumption about him that he is an evildoer - and behold, it is written (Exodus 23:1), "do not place [...] an evildoer to be a witness." But if he has [involvement] in the way of the world and is involved in some commandments, we accept his testimony, even though he is an ignoramus. You will be found to say that any Torah scholar is assumed to be fit until he is disqualified and [any] ignoramus is assumed to be disqualified until his status is established with us for the good. And so [too,] the most debased men are disqualified [rabbinically], such as those that eat in the marketplace in front of everyone. And included in the debased (Sanhedrin 26b) are those that consume the charity of gentiles publicly. And the rest of its details are elucidated in Sanhedrin and in Shevuot (see Mishneh Torah, Laws of Testimony 1).
Ask RabbiBookmarkShareCopy